[2013 TRC] New Zealand vs Argentina in Hamilton (07/09/2013)

[Big Ewis]

That is a typical politician/teacher sentence that people say when they lost/are about to lose an argument...

that's the dumbest possible interpretation I could ever imagine possible of my post...

No heineken, my small little friend, "I do disagree with the rest, though I see where you're coming from" is merely a polite but more importantly respectful and kind way to say to someone that I see some clarity and truth in what he's saying, but yet, still must disagree as an honest gentleman and proceed to establishing my own view.
Some people like peaceful places and agreeable discussion, while others come online to talk sports and try to "own" others with horribly disrespectful, or downright insulting comments (they, naturally, would never dare in the flesh).
Personally, I do prefer the former.

I don't like starting a comment with "you're such an idiot, and your comment is utter shyt because..." unless I'm pushed to. We're not usernames, we're people. You'll learn that with time, my small heineken, in a few years......................when you turn 21.

P.S.: I do think my point still stands btw. I don't think we can expect too much from Argentina yet.

 

[Colombia]

So your judging a pattern based on 1 match? That was RWC knockout match and it was par as opposed to all that impressive. No other top 8 team would be thinking a 23 point loss was all that great. Australia weren't exactly praising their effort in the semi final unlike Argentina who were full of it.

I also disagree that the Pumas played well in this game, given the conditions they should have kept it closer. The ball carrying was ineffective and there is no attacking pattern or invention to the play. Rarely is even an inside ball, a loop, a switch or anything attempted other than simple passing and rubbish kicks ahead. When you don't have big ball carriers, you need more than chip aheads to challenge a defence.

No, three matches. It's all about expectations, the Australian's are wildly unrealistic when it comes to NZ. Most expected Argentina to get blown away in a NZ fixture in NZ, it has yet to happen irrespective of conditions. They have been competitive for 60 minutes on every occasion, hopefully in seasons to come they can take it a step further and compete for the 80.

Top 8 is also too general. Argentina are roughly Wales/Ireland standard, Wales get well beaten in NZ too after being competitive for a while.

There was a thread on Phelan lately and nearly every match put forward in his defence by the apologists was a "brave effort" in a loss. Yet despite that, in the more winnable matches they have consistently failed to take the win. 2 wins and a draw in 5 years against top 8 opposition says it all, and that is what "is". Scotland have more wins against the Tri Nations sides than Argentina have against the top 4 6 Nations sides under Phelan.

When Ireland or England came close to South Africa last year but lost at home, or Wales when they lost closely to Australia and South Africa so often, I hardly heard any of their fans be delighted with the result. But when Argentina do it is seen as great by the Phelan apologists. It's almost as if they are yearning to be back in the 1990's and return to the status quo. South Africa at home and Australia are eminently beatable, Argentina are a good enough side not to have people bleating on with platitudes about effort and should be taking more of the chances they get (England 2011, South Africa & Australia 2012, South Africa 2013 spring to mind).

Again, it's about expectations. The 6N are tired of close losses to the SH because they've got a couple of victories over them in the NH in non-tournament conditions having played them so often. Argentina are just getting used to playing those teams regularly.

I'm not an apologist for Phelan however I don't believe a new coach is the answer any more than I think it was for Australia despite the moans of the Australian fans about Deans. Bottom line is they have Graham Henry on their side now, yet there is no magic formula.

 

[psychic duck]

No, three matches. It's all about expectations, the Australian's are wildly unrealistic when it comes to NZ. Most expected Argentina to get blown away in a NZ fixture in NZ, it has yet to happen irrespective of conditions. They have been competitive for 60 minutes on every occasion, hopefully in seasons to come

Top 8 is also too general. Argentina are roughly Wales/Ireland standard, Wales get well beaten in NZ too after being competitive for a while.

No you didn't, you based that the rain soaked matches weren't tightened by the conditions based on 1 match.

Wales have never played a match in New Zealand in rain soaked conditions or in RWC knockout conditions, only so long the Pumas lucky run can continue in this fixture and they will be back to the 41-7 results like 2004.

And last time Wales did play there in 2010 they lost by 19 points in dry conditions and nobody ever claimed that to be a great result worthy of praise and listing in a match of the coach's best games, unlike the Pumas. I bet if Wales played in the RWC final in 2011 they would have come within at least 10 of the All Blacks as well the nervous cautious way that match was played.

I bet if Argentina come close to beating injury hit off form Australia there will still be people saying how such great attitude, effort and great progress. It's utter rubbish and setting low standards.

Phelan has won just 2 games against top 8 sides in 5 years as coach. Time for the patronising platitudes to stop and treat Argentina like an elite nation, that means criticism for underachievement and addressing problems to strive to be better as well.

I hope that the Pumas can finally win a game soon to end the patronising about how great they were in 20 point defeats.

Again, it's about expectations. The 6N are tired of close losses to the SH because they've got a couple of victories over them in the NH in non-tournament conditions having played them so often. Argentina are just getting used to playing those teams.

No, the top 4 of the 6 Nations countries just set higher standards. I would like to see if an England, France, Ireland or Wales coach could get away with back to back home defeats to Scotland like Phelan in 2010. Those nations only lose at home to Scotland once in a long while, and never lose at home to Italy, and never ship 40 points to Ireland. Phelan has managed all, and lost to Scotland at home 3 times, and only beat them thanks to a refereeing howler in 2011 as well.

 

[Big Ewis]

... and never lose at home to Italy

yeh but 1 team in particular sure is having a hard time getting a win when in Rome !!

And I do admit you have a point about Argentina...but I think you go too far. I do however, nothing taken away from the Irish, believe Argentina just weren't nearly physically fresh at that point to take like 7 tries. Last match of the year, we've seen how NZ performed that same EOYT and many, many other upsets/strange scorelines drop around end of November in previous years aplenty too.
*ahem France Australia 2010*ahem*ahem !
They're coming off their first TRC against the 3 SANZAR nations, perform valiantly you must concede, and then still have some juice to get Wales quite easily, fall in France, and then crumble in Ireland.

But yes, they are inconsistent. Yes, they seriously have disappointed in certain matches in the past 1 or 2 years.

And about this very thread's match:
just watched the first half, NZ seriously played AMAZINGLY in this one. Super intense, excellent defense, pure quality not just intensity. And the Pumas still somehow hung in there despite being 10x slower, being shyt at lineouts, and with their backs not creating for the team.

But I understand your concern about the "setting low standards" notion. You certainly have a point there Daffy Duck. But we can't just expect victories quite yet, I say. It's great enough what they've accomplished last tournament, and besides the pathetic blowout in Jo-Burg this year, they're fine.

 

[ABs2011]

Amazing Argentina's Scrum tonight but awful line out too. Saili was a disaster

I know this has been covered in detail, but I'm sorry, I will have to put my two cents worth in.

With all due respect mate, this strikes me as quite a naive comment. The reality is, if you exclude the Saili knock-on he actually played very well. If you take the knock on into account, and put that down to massive nerves (if you look at that one head on, Saili was looking straight at the D, not the ball which is a tell tail sign his head wasn't in the game at that point), I actually think his performance becomes even more impressive. To pick himself up from the worst start to an AB career imaginable, and the play with confidence, a very solid game given the conditions was really impressive IMO. He ran hard, passed well and his D was solid.

That being said, I would start Nonu this week without a doubt. It's a shame the weather wasn't better, and Saili didn't really get his chance to shine, BUT Nonu still has the solidity that Saili has not proven yet. Nonu certainly has superior D, which should never be underestimated in top level footy, one could also argue Nonu has the style of game that is better suited to the AB tactics as well, and he of course has a world of experience. IMHO there are a bunch of people out there that have let emotions get in the way of good rugby judgment. Nonu at this stage > Saili until Saili proves otherwise and I suspect the AB selectors still agree.

 

[Colombia]

No you didn't, you based that the rain soaked matches weren't tightened by the conditions based on 1 match.

No, that's what you took from what I said. What I actually said was: "I'm pointing out this fixture in NZ usually has a 15pt difference between the teams after being competitive for 60 minutes irrespective of weather. "

i.e. the weather doesn't matter, it's been the same under wet and dry conditions. However, there's no need to continue on this part, we clearly disagree and we're not getting anywhere.

Wales have never played a match in New Zealand in rain soaked conditions or in RWC knockout conditions, only so long the Pumas lucky run can continue in this fixture and they will be back to the 41-7 results like 2004.

And last time Wales did play there in 2010 they lost by 19 points in dry conditions and nobody ever claimed that to be a great result worthy of praise and listing in a match of the coach's best games, unlike the Pumas. I bet if Wales played in the RWC final in 2011 they would have come within at least 10 of the All Blacks as well the nervous cautious way that match was played.

That's because they got their ass handed to them in the first test by over 30 points. Also, imo NZ would've beaten Wales soundly in the RWC final by 20 points plus (couple of late tries boosting the scoreline) they're just not on that level as a rugby nation. However, that is another "what-if", we should concern ourselves with "what-is".

I bet if Argentina come close to beating injury hit off form Australia there will still be people saying how such great attitude, effort and great progress. It's utter rubbish and setting low standards.

Phelan has won just 2 games against top 8 sides in 5 years as coach. Time for the patronising platitudes to stop and treat Argentina like an elite nation, that means criticism for underachievement and addressing problems to strive to be better as well.

I hope that the Pumas can finally win a game soon to end the patronising about how great they were in 20 point defeats.

But they're not an elite nation, they're Wales-Ireland standard. Should they be expected to beat Australia away from home? no, not even this Australian side. However they should set their sights on beating them at home - that's where they're at as a rugby nation right now.

No, the top 4 of the 6 Nations countries just set higher standards. I would like to see if an England, France, Ireland or Wales coach could get away with back to back home defeats to Scotland like Phelan in 2010. Those nations only lose at home to Scotland once in a long while, and never lose at home to Italy, and never ship 40 points to Ireland. Phelan has managed all, and lost to Scotland at home 3 times, and only beat them thanks to a refereeing howler in 2011 as well.

They're unrealistic, Wales and Ireland go on about beating NZ like it's a legitimate expectation but it's never happened in the pro era, and it's never going to happen. Why? they don't have the player base and depth.

Personally I wouldn't group France and England with Ireland or Wales, France and England have the players to beat NZ and they proved it repeatedly in the pro era. The other two get the odd good group of players and punch above their weight for a while. They can down a battle-worn South African or Australian side at home but they're never really going to beat the elite of the game regularly. Sure France and England can lose to Ireland/Wales but that doesn't translate to those latter two nations being able to beat NZ, and Argentina can't right now either.

Where are Argentina at in the RC? challenging to beat the Boks and Wallabies at home imo with the crowd behind them, that's their level right now. Imo that's just realism, and not the pumped up NH media who talk up chances of home victory for the celtic nations when they head South on tour.

May the Pumas prove me wrong this weekend. I'd like nothing more.